Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
thanks I was just about to ask i have a road trip tomorrow and I wanted to hear it,http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=52906154239
Heres and audio link and download to it if that helps, just click later when directed to next page and accept cookies.
Well said.Matt 7:13-23 these are unbelivers who never knew God
1 cor 3:12-15 love this for believers ... still saved
this guy is stating works save ... yet titus 3:5, eph 2:8, romans 4:5, 2 tim 1:9, heb 4:3
1 cor 15:2 ...........unless you believe in vain.
romans 9:31-32 ...10:1-3
faith ... defined is heb 11:1
all believers sin ... the reason for 1 john 1:8-10
1
Well said.
He's very legalistic, but done in a way that draws people into his position.
How is he legalistic? Do you mean legalistic in the sense that it's used in the Bible, or do you mean it in the modern sense of "he's pointing out something that the Holy Spirit is convicting me about. Therefore, he's legalistic"?
Biblically, the phrase means to require someone to adhere to the law for salvation. Could you please show where he's done that?
I've got to be honest with you, I've got at least a dozen of his messages on my ipod and I've never heard him preach legalism in the least. Just the opposite, in fact, he preaches that there are no works we can do to add to our salvation.
How is he legalistic? Do you mean legalistic in the sense that it's used in the Bible, or do you mean it in the modern sense of "he's pointing out something that the Holy Spirit is convicting me about. Therefore, he's legalistic"?
Biblically, the phrase means to require someone to adhere to the law for salvation. Could you please show where he's done that?
I've got to be honest with you, I've got at least a dozen of his messages on my ipod and I've never heard him preach legalism in the least. Just the opposite, in fact, he preaches that there are no works we can do to add to our salvation.
this message was fantastic! hard to swallow, and may leave much to be desired in the realm of the deeds vs. faith controversy, but still an amazing message that the youth NEED to hear.
we are not taught by law... 1 tim 1:7-10 NO NO
we are to learn by grace .. 2 peter 3:18 this is what you can do
we are not taught by law... 1 tim 1:7-10 NO NO
we are to learn by grace .. 2 peter 3:18 this is what you can do
Please see Paul's letter to the Romans, chapter 7.
HOW ABOUT
ROMANS 8 tHERE IS THEREFORE NO CONDEMNATION TO THEM WHICH ARE IN CHRIST JESUS
The KJV has it wrong. Among all the accepted "TR" manuscripts, only one has your "rest of the verse" in the original Greek. Why it was allowed to get into the KJV is beyond me. It violated every translational rule Erasmus, Stephanus and Beza established at the beginning over their effort. Your "rest of the verse" is an obvious copying error in which verse four was transcribed into verse one. It should have been edited out of the KJV long ago.And would you care to quote the rest of the passage, or are you content just to have that portion of one verse, taken out of context?
The KJV has it wrong. Among all the accepted "TR" manuscripts, only one has your "rest of the verse" in the original Greek. Why it was allowed to get into the KJV is beyond me. It violated every translational rule Erasmus, Stephanus and Beza established at the beginning over their effort. Your "rest of the verse" is an obvious copying error in which verse four was transcribed into verse one. It should have been edited out of the KJV long ago.
It is in the majority of the 400 manuscripts Erasmus et al used (which is what I meant to say ... it is in more than one manuscript but they are all in one family) but not in the majority of the 5,000 known manuscripts. Fewer than 10%. So my original statement was slightly in error, but the quote from your post is completely erroneous.The rest of the verse is there in the majority of the manuscripts.
It is in the majority of the 400 manuscripts Erasmus et al used (which is what I meant to say ... it is in more than one manuscript but they are all in one family) but not in the majority of the 5,000 known manuscripts. Fewer than 10%. So my original statement was slightly in error, but the quote from your post is completely erroneous.
"No, it's not" ?? And we go back and forth like a couple kindergartners for the life of the thread? I'm not going to do that.That is untrue. It is in most of the manuscripts.
And short of hauling the manuscripts to your house, how would you like me to do that? Investigate it for yourself, and stop relying on the wishful thinking of a group of pseudoscholars who cling to error for the sake of ego and being "right."The only way you'll convince me is with some good evidence otherwise.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?